Our own Nikon D700 replacement poll

Tell Nikon what you want in the Nikon D700 replacement - based on the Nikon's original survey - the more votes we get, the better chance someone will pay attention to this poll (you can select 4 choices only):

What? 18MP and no 24MP alternative? That’s discriminating 😉
Seriously, the next generation (D4, D800 etc) will be 24 MP inherited from this generation high resolution flagship D3x, like this generation was 12MP D3, D300, D700 – from the past D2x 12MP high resolution flagship.

Megapixel hater

I hope you are completely wrong.

PHB

Then buy a D3s or a D700s which are unlikely to disappear and will probably drop in price a little.

The problem with the poll is that the choices on offer do not really reflect real engineering tradeoffs. Adding a second memory slot, WiFi and GPS are a no-brainer from the engineering point of view.

I don’t see why anyone would prefer two slots over WiFi. If you have WiFi you could pair your camera with a WiFi base station that just sucks the pictures out of the camera as you are taking them. So you effectively have an infinite memory card size. OK the support gadgets will not be available on day one when the first WiFi cameras come out, but long term that is going to be a must have feature for any professional.

Reading between the lines here, if this is the poll we saw reported earlier, this does not look like a poll to ask what features people want, it looks like a poll to see how Nikon should market a camera that has already been designed.

I doubt that they can add/subtract the second card slot, but the WiFi/GPS chip is quite likely a separate module that could be added or not depending on whether there is demand.

If it is the same as the official survey, the fact that they are asking 12/18/24 question suggests that they have an 18MP sensor chip. Admin suggests that one was used for D4 testing a while back. I cannot imagine the D4 having less than 24MP, but 18MP for the -x version would make sense.

I can’t imagine that there will not be some D700 body that does not come out with the 12MP chip though.

Really? Needs? Looking at my wedding file which are all 12mp of some sort there appears to be an average of 90-100 files per gigabyte. Are you shooting weddings with anything less than an 8gb card? I certainly don’t.

Oh, and those are raw/12-bit/compressed. Cut that rate in half for 24mp. Still wouldn’t be a big deal. I’m using 16gb cards today, and expect to use equally fast or faster 32gb cards tomorrow. Dual slot is a non-issue.

Now a bigger or more sensitive sensor…yes, please.

And y’all need to give up on a 18mp FX sensor coming out in the next year, because it ain’t happening.

lol 2500 photos per wedding? You should look at improving your own skills not your machine gunning.

zeeGerman

Who uses the second card slot as extra memory??? The second card slot is an insurance against a failing memory card. If you charge a couple thousand Dollars for a wedding or an event, and you end up not having covered some of the essential parts, because your memory card stop working, you will be in real trouble, and sustainably have hurt your reputation.

Nikoneer

@zeeGerman: you’re absolutly right. But in this case, please use a D3/D3s/D3x. The D700 is a complete different tool with different strengths.

Roger Moore

I don’t see why anyone would prefer two slots over WiFi.

Simple. I frequently photograph in places where WiFi isn’t available, so it wouldn’t do me a lick of good most of the time. It also won’t be that exciting for people who shoot faster than the WiFi can keep up. That would include people who do a lot of high speed shooting in RAW mode and, presumably, people who would want to use the 1080P video.

PHB

There are already devices that you can get that allow you to dump CF crds to a built in hard drive.

Those will have WiFi as well.

You pair the camera to the portable box and it then acts as a local cache. 500Gb should be enough for most people – even on extended trips.

It should be 24-30mp EVENTUALLY. But HIGH ISO is the calling card of the format. We need to strike a balance. 18mp and improved ISO with slightly improved dynamic range would be GREAT, but it wouldn’t be a replacement for the current D700.

A replacement must also have dual slots to at least match the D300s and video for the whiners, including a slightly different arrangement of buttons for the sake of ever improving control (Nikon is already good at that, but we need about 2 more buttons that can be full programmable).

These changes together would clearly constitute a D800.

GlobalGuy

I would take 100% viewfinder over improved dynamic range, by the way. The D700 viewfinder is nice and bright and beautiful — but not being 100% is so frustrating and messes up my allignment far too often.

Mark

GlobalGuy,

I agree to a point, the dual card slot is needed but not the video. Imagine a model with FX 18MP, dual card slot for about $2500 to $3200? That seems like a nice fit between the D300s and D3s.

Built-in-bluetooth! Nikon, please make it able to send a picture to your iPhone via Bluetooth! Thus enabling editing the pic in Photogene or whatever and then publishing wherever you are, on the spot. Please.

Premek

If anything, built in wifi with option to upload to FTP, plus concurrent CF recording… Bluetooth is useless

Photogene max resolution is 1200. Pointless tbh, just buy a netbook with 3g dongle, or use your iphone to use as a tether point if you really want to do that sort of thing.

Deef

You must be kidding. Edit a 12mp file on iphone using fat fingers?
if you’re going to be a toilet tweeter, just use your iphone, leave the D700 to ppl wanting proper photos developed properly.

Lammy

There’s no point in people voting for 1080p video if there is no manual control to make it properly useful!

GlobalGuy

No kidding, it makes you wonder sometimes if the DSLR side and the point-and-shoot side even talk together at company parties….

f/2.8

The DSLR side talk to the P&S side alright. Just that marketing calls the shot on the P&S side.

Glass

also it better be proper mp4 format and not huge mjpeg

iamlucky13

Unfortunately, I personally doubt we’ll see that, since the amount of processing needed to compress mpg is much higher than for mjpg, unless the D700x or D800 is used to launch a new image processor. Since it sits in a new product position, there’s not really any precedence to fall back on as to whether Nikon would do that with a D700 lineage camera, but that seems more like something to expect in a year or two from a D4.

Somewhat related, wasn’t there a hack someone came up with for making 1080p30 from the LiveView feed on the D3?

I think dynamic range is the bottleneck now, and that’s where the next breakthrough should happen. The D3x delivers on the resolution, the D3s brings fabulous low-light performance, but neither comes close to the dynamic range of the human eye.

pgarland

I think this is because greater dynamic range is something that almost any photographer sees as benefiting them, whereas most of the other choices either address something that most shooters are not bothered by with in current cameras (LCD and battery life) or are more use-specific, e.g. landscape photographers aren’t going to ask for a faster continuous shooting rate, people with a studio presumably know where their studio is and don’t need GPS, many event photographers will be willing to trade MP for lower noise at high ISOs, whereas someone who can completely control their light can shoot at the base ISO and would take the extra pixels.

It’s the same with having a 100% viewfinder; ay photographer would prefer to see the entire frame.

100% viewfinder and more DR for sure and.. if available live histogram. Landscape photographers choice!!

D3 or D3s are expected to be for photojournal markets. Great AF, superb fps but D700/s/x/whatever is expected to be in other segment, people who have D700 are looking for image quality, low noise and DR.

Sony a900 and new a850 (superb price) could ate the whole market (even me… thinking in going to the new dark side…). So if its true Nikon wants beat 5D MkII (for me, already did it) and a900 thats the path.

Beyond a silent shutter, It would be nice to have a system that eliminates mirror slap. I mean, you can use MUP, but that isn’t as nice as no mirror slap at all.

Maybe I just need to buy a rangefinder….

dino

Hi
someone on another forum was asking if among the several choices we have on this poll there could be also a better AF sensors displacement (at least and possibly cross sensors at rule of the third crossing lines)

Gordon

Not many votes for 24MP sensor 🙁

Glass

not many of us want 30MB raw files to display on our screen at 8%…

SZRimaging

Don’t need it to print 13×19. Only need it if I was going to really really large print sizes.

At this point the next addition to my camera gear will be a full frame camera. I will wait for the D700 replacement. My current gear is more then adequate.

Gary

One key takeaway for Nikon is this (and I assume they already know): the D700 has been a fantastically successful camera, and many consumers are anxiously awaiting an updated version, one that presumably will have video.

It’s apparent that in the photo enthusiast community, among Nikons, the D700 series is the prize. When Nikon releases the D700 followup, they will generate a lot of enthusiasm to be followed up by sales. It’s a question of when they will be ready, and how soon they want to rack up those sales.

M!

what we want and what nikon will make is totally 2 different things. let’s be realistic.
when they made a D700 with the D3 sensor with a discount in price, you guys should already be very happy. Nikon can do a mid level pro camera with a D3X sensor and sell for $3-4k and still make money, cos the D3X is one year old now.
They can also do a D3S sensor but that would be too close to the D3S release. I say they try out a new sensor at 18MP and get it right as usual, (cos i have a D3X and waiting for my D3S).

I don’t understand why people would keep 12 mega pixel sensor VS. 18 to 24 mega pixel sensor. The poll reflects that people like a 12 mega pixel sensor (11%), VS. 10% for 18 mega pixel and 24 mega pixel at 6%. Do people understand that the higher mega pixels, the better details in shadow areas you will get.

The only conclusion that I can come up with, is that people do not want to pay for the high cost value on the camera, for example D3x. When D3x came out, the cost of the camera went though the roof. In Canada the cost after taxes was around $10,000. My thought on this subject would be that Nikon, should produce a higher mega pixel camera at a lower price range. Sony is already selling their Alpha DSLR A850 Body at $2299.00 on Vistek web site: http://www.vistek.ca/.

John

I think the main reason against more pixels is the file size = more cards, more hard drive space + backups, faster computer….

My guess is that the new sensor will be 16MP.

C Benson

I don’t think it size of the mega pixel because Sony and Canon already producing and make digital cameras at higher resolution/ mega pixel. You also don’t have to worry about computer space because hard drive are so cheep. You can buy a external hard drive, say 1 terabyte for $139.00 canadian.

I hope Nikon brings out 16-18 mega pixel camera.

Tam

I’m sorry, do you know how hard it is to maintain a RAID array? Or consider the inconvenience of a bunch of external hard drives?

What benefit exactly are you expecting from a 24mp sensor, lower fps, etc? If you want the numbers game like the old CPU Ghz wars, go Sony.

C Benson

If you are professional photographer, you are using a large amount of space per weekany ways. So what is the difference? Everyone knows you have to back up your info. on internal or external hard drives. Another way would be CD/DVD’s, but they can be expensive. Also, I never stated I wanted 24 mega pixel camera. i said “I hope Nikon brings out 16-18 mega pixel camera.”

PHB

I would not use RAID, I would buy a Windows Home Server for $500 and add in drives.

Home Server is not RAID, it is much better. You want RAID speed for video, but not for stills. The Home server is zero fuss, you don’t need to worry about rebalancing or any of that nonsense, just tell it which directories to keep multiple copies of. Then get yourself a couple of spare SATA drives and a USB adapter so you can take a backup and keep it offsite.

SZRimaging

@PHB Raid is more than speed. Raid is also redundancy. Many entirprise level raid systems are built for redundancy, not speed. Although once you get past RAID level 1 you get both speed and redundancy.

So far, the biggest issue with raid is the size of drives vs read/write errors. If you build the raid using some form of redundancy (0,5,6,10, 1+0) and use drives larger than 750 gigs, the likelyhood of a successful rebuild deminishes but quite a bit.

Jabs

Greetings,
About Windows Home Server:
The Operating system (WHS or Windows Home Server) is a real dud, and they have recently tried to rectify it recently to get it to WORK (I think version 2), hence Microsoft kept it quiet.
Do a Google Search or look at the IT web sites or such (computerworld.com, zdnet.com and others)
WHS is based upon a stripped down version of I think Win2003, but it has many issues and thus I WOULD NOT use it for photography.
Win7 is much better to use UNTIL they fix Win Home Server.
They have a few computers called Win Home Servers with lots of hard drives BUT you can do the exact same things with a NAS (Network Attached storage), provided you have GIGABIT Ethernet.
About RAID:
Raid 0 is best for pure speed and then you buy external storage for backup via SOFTWARE backup and then OFF COMPUTER storage, as in daily backups or such for storage.
Raid 0 stripes TWO hard drives and is used by Video, 3D guys while other versions of Raid are for failure redundancy in USE and often NOT speed.
Two SSD’s or WD Raptors in a Raid 0 setting will wipe away ANY Home Server – FACT!
Windows DOES not do well with SSD’s (Solid State Drives), as the support is not great yet – too NEW a feature.
If you want to use a continuous backup, then BUY a version of Windows Server.
Go to http://www.technet.com (A Microsoft Web site in America) and download one of the REAL Windows Servers for up to a 180 day trial, then use on a separate computer and decide yourself.
It works like Win Vista (Server 2008) and like Win 7 (Server 2008 R2) and Server 2003 works like Win XP, but better.
Most photographers are actually TOO computer illiterate, so perhaps you research there.
You need for Business purposes, a Server Operating System, as they are way faster than the ‘consumer stuff’ and then they don’t crash like that PLUS natively support features that you have to ADD TO or cannot get on the consumer OS’s.
The REAL Server OS’s are expensive (about $450 -750 for a One to Five license use), but they are so much faster than anything else from Microsoft.
You can also GET a yearly Technet Subscription and then have access to ALL or most of Microsoft Software, so look at that.
If I was using a Mac, I would use Mac OSX Server also.
Linux 64 bit is faster than both Windows 64 and Mac 64, as Linux has a ‘REAL TIME kernel’ version (used in Ubuntu Studio 64 bit and not regular Ubuntu) that blows others away, as I use it and the Windows Server Operating Systems too.
Bottom LINE:
Use two hard drives, say two 250 – 500 gig in a RAID 0 setup for your Operating System plus Programs and then USE another higher version of RAID with perhaps 4 to 6 drives to store YOUR content, as that is what you need to backup or even ‘mirror’ of.
Use SATA2 or 3 (new) 7200 or 10,000 rpm Drives in your RAID 0 setup and drives are cheap today. Consumer Operating Systems DO NOT do well with large amounts of files to catalog, view or even batch process, hence my recommendations on Servers.
It’s your dime – lol.

The (IMHO) only drawback of 12MP is that you sometimes cannot crop as hard as you want due to the resulting image would be too low res.

C Benson

If you have lots of patient you can wait for the downloads to complete, regardless of time frame. I have D300 and it’s 12 mega pixel camera and I use 4 gig card, shooting in raw format, The average time is about little over a hour to complete. Once I start the download I do something else, by working a photo or just walk away from the computer.

I hope Nikon fixes any problems that D700 had, so that that people can enjoy using the D700s/D800. I hope Nikon brings out 16-18 mega pixel camera because it will give more details in shadow areas.

Pshaw. Even Nikon’s oldest and cheapest current camera can already do that. Give us at least 1/1000 at least for this one that costs 6 times as much. Of course, the D40 is far superior to the D700 if you’re walking very far with it 🙂

What the?

God you’re such a ken -___-

With such high ISO capabilities, combine that with a decent prime lens and you don’t ever need yucky on camera flash.

And I really don’t get why and how you’d vote differently. Nikon lenses are outdated and many features are missing, which is why I feel that built in VR would certainly help. To be honest, I’d choose a 12mp camera with high iso, rather than a 24mp camera with great base ISO, even if the 12mp costs more.

First of all, I’ve never been one to care for sharpness and to pixel peep that much as to notice the slight detail of having “better base iso” out in the bright daylight. But I have been one to notice the great detail and sharpness that retains when you’re at ISO 6400 and your kid in the gym is tack sharp with no motion blur.

Char

Well, the fact that you do not understand why one would vote differently either has to do with the fact that you are ignorant or that you are unable or unwilling to think of other uses that such a camera might have. I will try to explain to you why I voted differently…

1080p? What shall I do with 1080p? My computer is unable to play it anyways. Besides, I do not plan to use video on my DSLR. I use my DSLR to take photos. I am not too good at that, but trying to improve. Video is a lot harder than photos to do in a good way, I would anyways suck at that, so why bother? Besides, when taking landscape shots, video is just not very interesting (as nothing moves). Timelapse can be nice, but does not need video capabilities at all – my D80 could do that if I decided to do it.

Full manual controls I dont need either, because… see above. But if I ever needed video, this would be important to me. Much more so than 1080p would be important – 720p is, as far as I know, already better than DVD quality and thus good enough for me.

Build in VR? What for? I hardly ever would have any use for it. Shooting people indoors, I am restricted to shutter speeds of 1/100s or faster anyways because of motion blur. Shooting real long lenses, you can hardly get any without VR and besides, the in-lens-VR has its advantages there. Other than that, even the VR of my 70-300 is off quite sometimes. Why? Because either I shoot at shutter speeds that do not need VR anyways, or I use a tripod. VR is not much of an important issue for me. It would not bother me, but I don’t need it either. Tripod is far superior to any VR anyways, the shots get sharper.

Last but not least, the 12MP super-high ISO. Well, I do not need any better ISO performance than the D700 gives anyways. I do not see what I would need ISO 12800 for. I would not complain about having it, but I can very well live with rather clean ISO 3200/6400. I just do not need more. Actually, even the ISO performance of my D80 is quite fine.

What I would like to see, though, is a little more resolution, cause I do a lot of landcape shots which could benefit from it (and yes, I do large prints). I would also like to see sRAW (since I do not always need full resolution, 3 RAW file formats, 24MP, 12MP, 6MP would be ideal) and a silent shutter mechanism, both not available as choices. I would like the dual card slot and would not complain about increased dynamic range. Furthermore, I would love “real” ISO 100, or even ISO 50.

I can generally understand anyone who wants different stuff (unless people are crying for 24MP and not ever printing larger than 40x60cm). I can also understand people who want faster FPS, or low MP, or better high ISO performance.

What I totally can NOT understand, though, is people that say “These are my choices and I can not see why anyone would vote differently”.

camerausercollector

I think we should also consider renaming the DSLR with video to DVSLR.
And i’m pretty much sure i’m the first one to call it.
Nikon first DVSLR 1080 rating with ##? of frame rates per second. What do you say folks? Shall we start another poll?

Ray

I second the 1/500th sync. We used to have that long ago with the D1x.

PHB

How about faster shutter speeds and ability to sync at any speed?

It is possible with an electronic shutter, the problem is that it takes one transistor per pixel and that means an effect on ISO.

I would like faster shutter speeds as I regularly find that ISO 200 is too high to shoot wide open in bright sunlight. I know you can use filters, but what a pain. And they also have negative impact on response curves just like using the low ISO numbers does.

An electronic shutter would be quieter and eliminate the last mechanical component from the camera. It would fix the jelly shutter effect.

I think it would be well worth a third of an ISO stop for an electronic shutter. Particularly if it was also possible to take high speed videos at greatly reduced frame sizes like some compacts are doing.

perhaps the poll should have included whether the respondent is amateur or pro?

grumps

I think there are some flaws to this type of questionnaire. The fact that people want higher resolution coming with a cost of assuming poor noise control at higher ISO, shouldn’t necessarily be assumed, it’s like saying it is IMPOSSIBLE to have any improvements. I know this wasn’t the absolute choice implied, but having higher MP choices, doesn’t mean you have to shoot at the highest resolution, correct?
Also that silent shutter and low shutter vibration is still important to me!
Also an old school way to show a locked focus aide through the viewfinder in very low light conditions (whatever this means) 🙂

Char

Well, currently it DOES mean that you have to shoot at higher resolution (unless you want to shoot JPEG), cause there are no sRAW options.

Joe Fish

Im keeping my D300 and lenses, but also buying a 5D mark II, it has all I need. And better high ISO than D700 as well.
If Nikon comes with a D700 replacement I might swap. But for now it will be Canon,
Sorry Nikon, you´r too slooooow.

I just wanted to get people’s opinion on how many of you consider HD video to be a must-have in your next DSLR?

Personally, I don’t intend to buy another DSLR without video, period. In fact, if the D700 replacement doesn’t have HD video, I will buy a Canon 5D MkII instead. Also, if the D700 replacement does have video, but Nikon does not do anything about the dreadful rolling shutter issues they’ve been having, I still may be tempted by the 5D MkII. I would like to stay with Nikon, so I hope that they make a product that I can use to sate my interest in videography.

Is HD video such a high priority for anyone else? Or am I alone here?

Jay

I don’t shoot video. 1080 video and manuel video control are irrelevant to me.

D700 lover

I find a bit weird how much talks replacement of D700 produces… Correct me if I’m wrong, but none of the past cameras made so much expectations… When at the same time I think it’s almost (I filled the poll) the perfect camera… To my opinion, D3 and D700 just made easy what was difficult and difficult but possible what was impossible (always speaking with a reasonnable price in mind)… Maybe people had something that was so good that now they want more and more… Logical, but stay realistic boys…

It’s really sad that (most of) the features Nikon REALLY needs to work on aren’t even on this list. Copied and pasted from my post on the DPReview forums:

1.) Nikon could spread out the cross-type AF points from their current configuration in the 51 point system. Sheer speed or other performance specs aside, this is where the D3 etc. fall short of the Canon 45 point AF system, in my opinion.

2.) Nikon could literally spread out the AF points, period. I LOVE how the D300’s AF points are all over the viewfinder, and it’d be awesome to see an enlarged AF system show up in FX bodies. I dunno if this is possible without seriously enlarging the camera, unfortunately.

3.) Nikon could figure out a way to get their grip rubber to stay on. It’s been like, over a decade now with this stupid stuff that keeps falling off every camera I own. Same goes with the lenses. Anyone who has shot for a few years in hot places, you know what I’m talking about.

4.) Nikon could make some major advances in customization and control. Namely, it is high time that ISO become a full-time exposure setting. No, not a third command dial. Just more extensive customization of the existing two dials. For example, in some situations my ISO NEVER changes all day, but I dial my aperture and shutter speed all over the place. In OTHER situations, and this is more often the case for the kind of work I do, I leave my aperture wide open for thousands of images in a row, and need to dial the ISO up or down. Auto-ISO is good, and Nikon has been at the forefront of that, but when I want fully manual exposure, auto-ISO is out of the question…

And there are plenty of other customizations that could be added. I’d LOVE to see the option to lock down particular controls- Maybe (via customization menu) the ability to disable the image quality adjustment button, or the delete button, mmm? The D3 has the ability to lock the metering mode, which I think is NOT a good option, since it is a physical button that can’t be customized as far as I know. I LOVE how the D300 / D700 have the metering mode right there at my thumb position, so I can change metering while shooting.

Etc. etc. You see, there are plenty of things I feel Nikon could improve upon! I just hope they aren’t blinded by the bigger specs for much longer. Most people don’t need more than 12 megapixels, nor 8 FPS, nor mediocre video. Problem is, they WANT it. What people WANT is getting in the way of what they NEED, from a marketing standpoint… In my opinion.

(end copy-paste)

I honestly don’t care that much about quantum leaps in sensor technology, as far as MP, ISO, or DR are concerned. I’m sure they’re working on improving those features, they’re almost a GIVEN, with enough time. What I’d LOVE LOVE LOVE to see from Nikon are some *real* changes, improvements to the real-world functionality of cameras. It’s a shame that we overlook these needs so quickly, and bicker about whether HD video is more important than megapixels or FPS.

=Matt=

Canon Fangirly

I wish you were an engineer over at Nikon. You are my new personal hero.

I’m just trying to inject a little sensibility into photographers out there. Unfortunately photographers (and geeks in general) are band-wagon prone, and we see marketing departments always pushing for things that really don’t need as much attention as the other improvements… Oh well…

Christina

Bravo!!
Love your interest in improving functionality!

I am also hoping they make some functionality changes, but again, they care more about bumping up pixels and giving us video.

My husband shoots with a (Whisper-Pentax K20D) and he has wonderful functionality that doesn’t exist in Nikon.

D700 lover

I agree with the grip rubber… Is so annoying… But at least they repair it for free (here in Switzerland), which I find normal…

Improvements? How about dreams: binning in black and white? A way to make the Bayer’s filter move and thus make ultra low light pictures (together with binning would be awesome!!!!)
But these are dreams only…

Roland

First, sorry for my english, I’m french.
I have a D700 since 1 year, before I had a D70 (june 2004) and after a D300 for 1 year.
For me the problem with the D700 and other FX Nikon cameras is not the camera but the lenses.
I like to work with transstandard zooms. For the DX format Nikon, there are a lots of Nikkors available (16-85, 18-105, 18-105, 18-135, 18-200, etc…), but for the FX format there are only the very expensive, big and heavy f2,8 nanocoating lenses.
An “expert” zoom (say 24-135mm f3,5-4,5 with VR) would be good enough for me (and for a lot other Nikonians I know), but it don’t exist in Nikon lenses catalog.
Forget the 24-120 VR wich is optically very bad (soft soft soft), so you have not a lot of choice.
And therefore, I must say that I am very frustrated since I changed from DX to FX.

photonut

darn …. based on the poll I won’t get the 24 MP in the next cam … 🙁

Marc W.

Where is the “I’m not upgrading” option?

Anonymous

I bet its goin to be a small D3S with lower iso lower fps and certainly not higher hd resolution for smaller price stop dreaming guys ;but a higher iso and video mode will be enough to be a god news !! ain t it??

SBGrad

Need a companion poll for what new lenses we want.

Bob from Ohio

I can’t imagine not having at least 24 megapixels in the D800 or D700x. I don’t know if the rest of you are blind, but I can EASILY see the difference in clarity between the D3s or D700 and the D3x. The detail is just jaw dropping and easily seen.

We already have rediculously high ISO’s in two other pro Nikon cameras, we need an affordable 24 meg (or much higher) in a small body and pop-up flash camera!!

Not just 18 like Canon did, 24 (+) and SOOOOON!!!!

I have been waiting and waiting for this camera.

COME ON ALREADY NIKON, GIVE US THE DREAM CAMERA!!

Bob from Ohio

photonut

“I can’t imagine not having at least 24 megapixels in the D800 or D700x. I don’t know if the rest of you are blind, but I can EASILY see the difference in clarity between the D3s or D700 and the D3x. The detail is just jaw dropping and easily seen.

We already have rediculously high ISO’s in two other pro Nikon cameras, we need an affordable 24 meg (or much higher) in a small body and pop-up flash camera!!”

Exactly!!!!!

Sign me up!!!

Probably sometime next year Sony might have a 30+MP cam in the <3k range. Tempting, especially considering that you can get Zeiss lenses with AF.

quatschmacher

On the Nikon survey there was a lot of space to give additional suggestions about Nikon and I made a fair few (plenty of which have been mentioned above). One thing I forgot which I wished I’d thought of at the time is that I’d like to see CaptureNX bundeled free with the camera.

Bman

Many people are thinking that there is no way there will be an 18 megapixel sensor. to me it makes sense because it is already out there. Lieca uses it. Maybe nikon would use the same/similar version of it but tweak it to give better performance.

Chris P

I too got a Nikon survey and completed it, and I also forgot to put in a comment when I completed those sections. The comment would have been “Please give me the dynamic range, tonality and transparency film choices I had with my Fuji S5”. I love my D700, but my dream camera is still a 12 + 12 Mp full frame version of the S5.

The comment I did put in was that Nikon does need a range of lenses between the ‘prosumer’ and ‘professional’ ranges.

Bubba Satori

1080
18mp
Higher DR
>5fps

Carbonhagen; 120 private jets, 1,200 limos & 40K tons of CO2.

simon oz

I hope nikon release this camera with 1080 24/25 video mode. I work in film and canons 5dm2, despite its limitations is really making an impact in several sectors. DSLR’s with video are small and discrete and are a great addition to my HD camera arsenal. I hope nikon dose not miss the opportunity to grab some of this market.
I like my nikon cameras but i’m forced to rent canon to accommodate jobs where 5dm2 is the only camera that can shot acceptable HD footage… sorry but 720p dose not cut it with an already compressed file.

Mark

I am so happy this poll is being done, I do think someone from Nikon may take a look and feel that they are getting some sort of insight.

I do worry about one part of the poll. Two options I fear may be splitting up voters some. There is an option to vote for more MP at the 18MP sensor option and at the 24MP option. Sure you can vote for both but I think most are picking one or the other.

I propose that most that voted for one of those options would at least be happy with the other. The real divide among those interested in the new upcoming D700x/s-D800 is more of a photo or video gain. I belong to the camp of “give me more megapixels” for my bigger printing. Others are in the “I want to do video” camp.

I think Nikon needs to see the combined vote of more Megapixel count. Video is being well served by the other models for the moment. Nikon needs to set itself to fight Canon and Sony on the full frame sells. Presently Sony leads the price war and Canon leads in the Megapixel count. Nikon needs to add megapixel and be conscious of price point.

DP

i like video and if Nikon is going to put it in, it should be done right, 1080p full manual control, autofocus capable, and electronic shutter

i would like to see an electronic shutter or regular shutter option to allow high flash sync speeds, the D70, D40 have unlimited shutter sync speeds and also don’t have some of the issues that mechanical shutter introduce with fast movement

back to video, as much as i like it, the ergonomics and features of the DSLR are in my opinion not up to the job –

the reason the 5d MK II is so popular is that the video camera makers just don’t get it

i would propose a F mount video camera with a purpose built video 1080P APS-C and or FF sensor price in the $1500 (APS-C) and $2500 (FF) body only region

add some more pins for a motorized zoom but make it backward compatible with all F mount lenses

give it the video equivalent of NEF as an output option and the capability to stream to a hard drive

Ghyz

The most important improvement is to set a quiet mode !!!

The D700 is one of the most achieved camera but its noisy capture mode makes it difficult to use whatever the circumstances. Try to use on a scene while a actors are playing and you’ll find the situation quite embarrasing as a photographer.

i wonder what the timing will be. I just sold my D300 to make room for a FX camera… Do I get the D3s or wait for this one. I can wait 3-5 months max.

The One

The problem with many of the people on this forum is that you are never satified. Even if Nikon came out with a 24mp d700x, many of you would still want something more have have something to complaint about. But the funny thing is that 99% of those who are complaing about Nikon producing more megapixels and wanting a d700x can’t even afford it even if it came out. The d700 is a great camera (which I DO own unlike those who can only complain about, but never own or afford one), but it makes me laugh at how people complain about it but never personally use or own one in their life. Even if Nikon came out with a d700x with 24 mp, most of you would now complain and want 30 mp, and when 30 come out, you want 40mp…and on and on…yet you never use or even own any of those cameras…because all you can afford is probably a point-and-shoot if you’re lucky, and only fantasize about own or using anything like a professional d700 and up. In fact, the closest time you will ever come to a d700 is looking the picture online drooling and getting a hard-on, but complaining about it because you know you will never be worthy to own one.

thats understandable, but i also think people’s frustrations are around that bits and pieces of what we want exist, but not in complete camera. I want the ISO performance of the D3s, with the resolution of the D3x, with the full video power of the Canon Mark IV. I think most of us understand that TODAY, it is too much to ask for 24 MP, but maybe a compromise on better than 12 (been at 12MP for a while), but still keep the ISO performance. I personally would love a 16-18mp one for cropping purposes mostly as I shoot indoor convert and performance mostly, and would like to crop to a certain element of the stage.

Bill

The poll missed one important question. Would you choose a new Nikon if it were a Very competitive Price compared with Canon, Sony, Pentax Higher Meg. Cameras.
Nikon seems to come in $1,000 higher than other manufacturer’s cameras.
They need to get out of the 12 megapixel mind set and get creative with an 18 to 24 megapixel at a competitive priced model and offer two verswions, one without video for those who could care less and one with high def video, and of course, full frame. Some of us D200 users who love our camera see no reason to fork out another $1,700 for a camera (D300s), that, even though improved dramatically, does not justify a replacement. Now, show me an 18-24 MP/ full frame without the video aspect, large live view screen and cmes in a few $$ lower than Canon’s 7D and Sony’s lger megapixel camera and I think Nikon would have a bst seller.
Other than wedding photographers, an old hardcore still frame shooter probably is not impressed with 1080 HD. Thats why God invented Video cameras. For those who like ot shoot video.
Nikon really needs to get their head out of the sand and start going back to offering something that EXCITES the old Die Hard still shooter who has a larger format printer nowdays that wants that litle extra punch without having to sell the house to afford it. Im one of those who still has his Hassleblad and lenses, a Nikon F3, N80, D100 and D200. I need something to get me excited. The D700 almost got me there except for the 12 MP. I was hoping for at least a 16 or more in that model and closer to $2,000 instead of $3,000.
A few of my Nikon Forever friends are now shooting Canon D5 II’s and D7’s and a couple have gone the SONY higher MP route. Nikon is starting to get left behind in in the shuffles. All those in the photo club I attend are not impressed with Video. We all do still landscape and model photography with weddings thrown in too.
Just my thoughts.

Groosome

I’m surprised very few people I’ve read seem to note that the D700 is the only FF camera with a built in flash. If I don’t win one first I’ll probably buy it or it’s successor shortly 🙂

Yes Nikon may need to catch up on the competition’s offerings of higher res and/or video in an FF body but the competition should also be looking at a built in flash on an FF body. I like to shoot available light as much as possible and want A flash available so I can use it without planning to take it with me.

P.S. Glad the poll had the 100% viewfinder as an option and that it’s got loads of votes cause 95% frame coverage on a camera of this level doesn’t cut it.

Matias

I would buy the d700 on the spot if a good 24-105/f4 vr was around.

Oliver

Probably the best for Nikon would be to replace the D700 not by one model but by two a D700s and a D700x, as this everyone could choose the model he needs (as they have done with the D3).

Personally I really don’t care about video features, I am a photographer (this is just marketing…), but I am waiting for a compact 24MP for a while by now (and really not a 18 MP).

Of course Nikon have to consider the price more carefully, they need to make money but us too, as it’s getting harder, nowadays, to be able to live with professional photography. Including video features just raise up the price for something that most of us don’t need (as Bill says “Thats why God invented Video cameras”), this is just to be supposedly competitive with Canon.

If the viewfinder don’t not cover 100% of the frame, it would be nice if it was well centered by the way …